Perception, Face and Confucian Values in Institutional Discourse
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The extant research on politeness has been influenced by Brown and Levinson’s (1987) politeness theory. However, the author argues that this research tradition does not deal with meta-physical dimensions (e.g. epistemological, philosophical, and ethical aspects) embedded within (im)polite linguistic strategies. In the author’s understanding, politeness cannot just be equated with the outcome of face-threatening acts (FTA) because politeness is a multimodal discursive concept. This means that what is polite (or impolite) should not depend entirely on linguistic analysis but should focus on the diverse interactional factors arising from locally specific discourse contexts. This leads an observer to see politeness as existing beyond the discursive level, which necessarily incorporates perceptive dimensions (epistemological, philosophical, and cognitive). The author proposes that the Confucian frame, which individuals utilize in the construction of face and which reflect culturally shared thinking in Korean speech, is a useful concept to help investigate individual’s strategic face over politeness in contemporary Korean linguistic analysis. In this study, the author integrates a Confucian framework with the spoken discourse approach. The findings of this empirical research highlight two important aspects of Korean honorific use in relation to linguistic politeness. Firstly, cultural values affect the perception of ‘R’ and function as face redress mechanisms so as to activate control over the social variables (P, D, and R). Secondly, the cultural script (the Confucian script) effectively negotiates institutional identities since Confucian thinking forms a foundation for a ‘common-sense’ knowledge that underlies social practice. Cultural knowledge can thus be effectively used for communicating interpersonal face due to its pragmatic function.
Abstract
The extant research on politeness has been influenced by Brown and Levinson’s (1987) politeness theory. However, the author argues that this research tradition does not deal with meta-physical dimensions (e.g. epistemological, philosophical, and ethical aspects) embedded within (im)polite linguistic strategies. In the author’s understanding, politeness cannot just be equated with the outcome of face-threatening acts (FTA) because politeness is a multimodal discursive concept. This means that what is polite (or impolite) should not depend entirely on linguistic analysis but should focus on the diverse interactional factors arising from locally specific discourse contexts. This leads an observer to see politeness as existing beyond the discursive level, which necessarily incorporates perceptive dimensions (epistemological, philosophical, and cognitive). The author proposes that the Confucian frame, which individuals utilize in the construction of face and which reflect culturally shared thinking in Korean speech, is a useful concept to help investigate individual’s strategic face over politeness in contemporary Korean linguistic analysis. In this study, the author integrates a Confucian framework with the spoken discourse approach. The findings of this empirical research highlight two important aspects of Korean honorific use in relation to linguistic politeness. Firstly, cultural values affect the perception of ‘R’ and function as face redress mechanisms so as to activate control over the social variables (P, D, and R). Secondly, the cultural script (the Confucian script) effectively negotiates institutional identities since Confucian thinking forms a foundation for a ‘common-sense’ knowledge that underlies social practice. Cultural knowledge can thus be effectively used for communicating interpersonal face due to its pragmatic function.
참고문헌 (49)
- Arundale, R. B, "Face as Relational and Interactional: a Communication Framework for Research on Face, Face Work, and Politeness", Journal of Politeness Research, 2(2), pp.193~216 (2006)
- Blum-Kulka, S, "Indirectness and Politeness in Requests: Same or Different?", Journal of Pragmatics, 11(2), pp.131~146 (1987)
- Brown, L., "Korean Honorifics, Politeness and Face, Poster Presentation Given at the “Politeness: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Language and Culture”", Conference Hosted by the Linguistic Politeness Research Group on 12 March 2005 (2005), the University of Nottingham, UK
- Brown, P., "Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena, In Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction", pp.56~311 (1978), Cambridge University Press
- Brown, P., "Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage" (1987), Cambridge University Press
- Byon, A, "The Role of Linguistic Indirectness and Honorifics in Achieving Linguistic Politeness in Korean Requests", Journal of Politeness Research, 2, pp.247~276 (2006)
- Chang, Y, "The Urban Korean as Individual, In Korean Society", pp.147~161 (1976), International Cultural Foundation
- Eelen, G., "A Critique of Politeness Theories" (2001), St. Jerome Publishing
- Escandell-Vidal, V, "Towards a Cognitive Approach to Politeness", Language Sciences, 18, pp.629~650 (1996)
- Fukushima, S., "Requests and Culture: Politeness in British English and Japanese" (2000), Peter Lang
- Harris, S, "Being Politically Impolite: Extending Politeness Theory to Adversarial Political Discourse", Discourse and Society, 12(4), pp.451~472 (2001)
- Harris, S, "Politeness and Power: Making and Responding to ‘Requests’ in Institutional Settings", Text, 23(1), pp.27~52 (2003)
- Haugh, M, "The Discursive Challenge to Politeness Research: An Interactional Alternative", Journal of Politeness Research, 3(1), pp.295~317 (2007)
- Heritage, J., "Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk: Analysing Data, In Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice", pp.222~246 (1997), Sage Publications
- Holmes, J., "Power and Politeness in the Workplace" (2003), Pearson Education Ltd
- Hong, J-O., "A Discourse Approach to Korean Politeness: Towards a Culture- specific Confucian Framework", 박사, pp.2009
- 홍진옥, "Beyond Politeness: A Spoken Discourse Approach to Korean Address Reference Terms", 영어어문교육, 15(2), pp.93~119 (2009), 한국영어어문교육학회
- 홍진옥, "A Discourse Approach to Korean Request Strategies: Korean Honorific Forms and Cultural Values", 언어과학연구, 56(56), pp.255~278 (2011), 언어과학회
- 홍진욱, "The Role of Confucian Scripts in Achieving Linguistic Politeness in Korean Requests", 언어과학연구, 59(59), pp.369~394 (2011), 언어과학회
- 홍진욱, "Korean Requests as Reflected in Institutional Discourse Contexts", 언어과학연구, 61(61), pp.303~328 (2012), 언어과학회[DOI]
- 홍진욱, "Constituting Face and Identities in Korean Institutional Discourse", 언어과학연구, 63(63), pp.369~394 (2012), 언어과학회
- Hutchby, I, "Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications" (1998), Polity Press Black Publishers Ltd
- Ide, S, "Formal Forms and Discernment: Two Neglected Aspects of Linguistic Politeness", Multilingua, 8, pp.223~248 (1989)
- Ide, S, "Preface: the Search for Integrated Universals of Linguistic Politeness", Multilingua, 12(1), pp.7~11 (1993)
- Kang, A., "Talk, Interaction, and Cultural Persistence: Constituting Korean American Discourse in a Meeting Context", 박사, pp.2000
- Kim, M. S, "Intercultural Communication Competence, In Intercultural Communication Competence", pp.112~131 (1993), Sage
- Kim, M. S, "Cross-cultural Comparisons of the Perceived Importance of Conversational Constraints", Human Communication Research, 21(1), pp.128~151 (1994)
- Kim, M. S, "A Cross-cultural Comparison of Implicit Theories of Requesting", Communication Monographs, 61(3), pp.210~235 (1994)
- Kroskrity, P. V., "Language, History, and Identity: Ethno-linguistic Studies of the Arizona Tewa" (1993), The University of Arizona Press
- Leech, G., "Principles of Pragmatics" (1983), Longman
- Locher, M., "Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication" (2004), Mouton de Gruyter
- Locher, M., "Politeness Theory and Relational Work", Journal of Politeness Research, 1, pp.9~33 (2005)
- Matsumoto, Y, "Re-examination of the Universality of Face: Politeness in Japanese", Journal of Pragmatics, 12(4), pp.403~426 (1988)
- Mills, S., "Gender and Politeness" (2003), Cambridge University Press
- Milroy, L., "Observing and Analyzing Natural Language" (1987), Blackwell
- Pan, Y., "Politeness in Chinese Face-to-Face Interaction" (2000), Ablex Publishing Corporation
- Reiter, M-R., "Linguistic Politeness in Britain and Uruguay: A Contrastive Study of Request and Apology" (2000), John Benjamins Publishing Company
- Schank, R. C., "Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human knowledge Structures" (1977), Erlbaum Associates
- Schegloff, E. A., "On the Organization of Sequences as a Source of ‘Coherence’ in Talk-in Interaction, In Conversational Organization and Its Development", pp.51~77 (1990), Ablex
- Schegloff, E. A., "Opening up Closings", Semiotica, 8, pp.289~327 (1973)
- Schegloff, E. A., "Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis" (2007), Cambridge University Press
- Sifianou, M., "Politeness Phenomena in England and Greece: A Cross-Cultural Perspective" (1992), Oxford University press
- Sohn, H. M., "Linguistic Expedition" (1986), Han Shin Publishing Company
- Ten Have, P., "Doing Conversation Analysis: A Practical Guide" (1999), Sage Publications
- Terkourafi, M., "Politeness in Cypriot Greek: A Frame-based Approach" (2001), University of Cambridge, UK
- Thornborrow, J., "Power Talk: Language and Interaction in Institutional Discourse" (2002), Longman (Pearson Education)
- Watts, R. J., "Politeness" (2003), Cambridge University Press
- AnnaWierzbicka, "The Theory of Cultural Scripts as a Tool of Cross-cultural Communication", 한국어학, 18, pp.191~218 (2003), 한국어학회
- Yum, J. O., "Communication Theory: Eastern and Western Perspective, In Korean Philosophy and Communication", pp.71~86 (1987), Academic Press